# Why is a career/family priority problem not a constructive dilemma?

If you make your career your top priority, then your family life will suffer but if you make your family life your top priority, then your career will suffer. Either your family life will suffer or your career will suffer. So, you will make your career top priority or you will make your family top priority.

I don't understand why this is NOT a constructive dilemma.

The form of constructive dilemma is:

1. A or B
2. A -> C
3. B -> D
4. Ergo C or D

or alternately if C and D are the same:

1. A or B
2. A -> C
3. B -> C
4. Ergo C

(omitting the move form C or C to C).

The example you have above:

A = you make your career your top priority C = your family life will suffer B = you make your family you top priority D = your career will suffer.

I get the following premises:

1. A -> C
2. B -> D
3. C or D
4. Therefore A or B

This is not a constructive dilemma because 3 and 4 are reversed. If you check with a truth table you will find it does not follow (specifically A and B can both be false, and either C or D true, and then all premises would be true but the conclusion false).

Stated in another way, this is invalid for the same reason affirming the consequent is invalid.